M3 performance disappointing
 

My brother recently bought a '02 M3 SMG. We had a little dice from a rolling start in first all the way up to 100. We both started side by side and by the end I was looking at him in my rear view mirror. This was repeated several times with the same end result. Road/Track was ever so slightly damp and to avoid a row we agreed to call it a draw. But the fact was even in third/fourth gear where there surely cant be any loss of traction he wasnt catching me.

Dont get me wrong, I would give my right arm for the M3 but performance wise I have to say I was a little disappointed.

Oh yeah, my car is a '99 V5 Type R, remapped for '98 octane, straight thru exhaust, running 1.3bar. Other than that it is standard. I would guess somewhere round the 300Bhp mark.

Holy thread ressurection Batman! :eek:

lol

But that's an artificial scenario that you wouldn't reproduce on the road for performance driving. You chose a gear that suits the characteristics of the engine. to go for 4th and 5th at 30mph would be daft! My friend has an M3 convertible and when he took me out for a spin and wanted to demonstrate the performance, he did what we'd all do, put it in second and planted it! :D

I will tell you that in those conditions the M3 would be beaten by the Skyline and by any Scooby running over 310bhp. The latter would also feel more dramatic owning to the significantly greater torque produced by forced induction and lower weight.

Ns04

Edit: Must look at thread dates before contributing in future!! :D

The Jspec fuel pump suffers fuel cut @ 1 bar. If you want to go above 1 bar, say BPU which is 1.2 bar then you will need an uprated fuel pump.

At 1.2 bar you are looking at 380-410bhp depending on other mods.....

so yes, the standard toyota fuel pump can easily blow away the 280 mark, btw, all jspec supras when dynod will push over 300bhp standard, normally 310-325bhp easily in stock form.

what that probably says is that there is no substitute for driver talent.... ;)

Hmm what the hell's going on here then?

As standard cars the M3 and skyline are very evenly matched in performance terms but who in the right mind buys a skyline and keeps it standard!

As for the choice between 355 and CSL, i paid my money i made my choice and i've never looked back

FPMSL- that's the funniest comment I've seen on here for a long time :D

i know the thread is years old but all i'll say is(referring to the first couple of pages) that if you want to put your foot down at 40mph in 4th or 5th, what are you doing in either a skyline or m3? you need a turbodiesel:lol1:

took me 15min to look at 11 pages.. :freak3:

but i'd go for the R34 GTR :notworthy

they are so rare!!! i see at least 10 M3s everyday.. and i have only seen one R34 on the road in 4years :cool:

I find that the lack of torque below 2500 RPM on my stock turbo 2 litre Evo IX is less of a performance issue than the lack of torque anywhere of the E46 M3 SMG I sold to get the Evo. The SMG didn't change quickly enough to offset the lack of torque - as quick as the fastest manual change at redline (but no quicker, the 80ms time is just the actuator time, the torque drops for about 4 times longer than that), but nothing like as quick to drop 3 gears to get in the power band and go.

In the Evo I have a strong power band from 2500 to 7600 RPM, it no more laggy than many a modern diesel. In the M3 it was strong from 4500 to 8000 RPM, but diesels could outrun you if you left it in 6th gear... The Evo with less than £500 spent accelerates at 4500 RPM as hard as the M3 did at 8000 RPM at the same road speed, not surprising since it makes similar power at the wheels at 4500 as the M3 does at 8000 RPM.

The more flexible engine is not the 3.2 straight six here but the weedy 2.0 turbo with light mods that are easily done. There is no point modifying the M3.

properly setup turbos are hard to beat for
 

power and torque, the days of saab 99's and the like are well gone.

Saying that the M3 does have very linear power delivery whith no real kick and as such can feel slower. In some circumstances it is, but what it does provide is a very easy package to feed the power in and get on the gas early....very useful in a rear driver.

I was following a fq320 down a dual carriage way and I could not gain on him in any gear during our play, in fact sometimes he pulled a few yards on me....very impressive.

Saying that at the ring or any smooth rd I'd take the m everytime, down a bumpy B rd I'd take a scoob or evo. After having the m now for 6 months I do miss the scoob for its all round ability however for that 1 in 10 occasion where the rd, traffic and weather are right nothing touches the feeling of the M.

Take 500 RPM of lag off and add 80 BHP and 60 lbft to the FQ320 and it then becomes quite special :D

The disappointment with the M3 was that the throttle control and steering didn't make the most of the NA RWD setup. The steering of the Evo feels like broadband internet compared with dial up on the M3 (cooking version not CSL)...

If the steering really gave confidence in the front end and the throttle control was smoother, it could be more playful. As it was, it was a case of waiting for the next bump to push it off line rather than the balance of the right foot. And there was a huge feeling of mass compared with the Evo even though it is only 10% or so heavier.

I expect the CSL would be both better and worse in that the front end should be more planted, but overall even less compliant.

The Evo is quite special in that the chassis and AYC give it the tail led nature of the M3 without the bite. Maybe that takes the skill away, but balancing an M3 on the throttle on the public road with DSC off is dubious for someone of even fairly decent driving ability IMHO.

the rds of scotland really don't suit the m either
 

drove mine down a b road with lots of camber changes and bumps and thought I was going through the roof. If I'm honest its only abroad (i.e. the ring) where the m was fantastic. You can tell it was setup there, once you got up to 9/10ths in that environment it suddenly all makes sense..the steering actually comes alive and the chassis balance is incredible. I was lapping BTG 10 seconds faster then my scoob and this was not totally down to bigger bhp in the m.

I can see myself coming back to the evo/scoob world maybe in a year or 2, for now just enjoying another very different type of car.

WTF R U on about?
the skylines are just fast,nothing to do with drivertalent.

BTW,WTF is goin on with this thread....its still going?

RS4 will **** on them both argument over ;) As it goes both cars these days are beaten by quite a few motors these days, they were top dog at one point, but those days are over. Anyway R34 GTR>>>M3

M3 CSL>>>R34GTR NURB

I'm seeling my scoob and going for an R33 GTR V-spec....

oh dear....what am I doing???? :lol1: :lol1: :lol1:

LOL - what makes you think the supra is slow......and Im not talking about the straights.... :)

I've got a best motoring vid (standard spec cars) that is very interesting for you to watch.....perhaps you will learn something ;)

Skylines are lovely cars and the R34 look good too (others look minging) - despite having the worst jap interiors ever :D

Found the name BestMotoring-Battle_in_Tsukuba95.avi

the r34 anyday

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e3...bnr34nur_7.jpg

I love those R34s

That looks Very nice, so damn mean and I bet it goes like stink even in the hands of an amateur

you got a pic of the interior?

not really official, but translated commentry is kinda funny

http://youtube.com/watch?v=MkQFLvorANg

WHAT? supras slow?

cant be bothered to comment on that

my mates car was 450 bhp+ not standard,neither was the skyline

the little drive we had was on a straight with minor bends.

the skyline was 2 car lengths ahead at the end.


thanks for trying to teach me to drive

I will recomend you to others (yeah)